SF may soon ban natural gas in homes and businesses undergoing major renovations

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Housing & Regulation Context

  • Several commenters argue the gas-renovation ban is a distraction from SF’s core problem: constrained housing supply driven by NIMBYism, Prop 13, and protection of incumbent homeowners.
  • Mandating electrification on “major renovations” is seen by critics as another cost layer that worsens affordability, especially in a city where many buildings are already in poor condition and under-renovated.
  • Others counter that renovations rarely increase housing capacity; they mostly upgrade existing units, so this policy has little impact—positive or negative—on the fundamental housing shortage.

Cost and Feasibility of Electrification

  • For new construction, multiple people note that all‑electric designs can be cheaper than running gas piping.
  • For older SF housing, examples are given where electrical panel upgrades (to 200–300A), rewiring, and potential PG&E infrastructure work can run $10k–$60k+, significantly raising renovation costs.
  • There is disagreement over who ultimately bears these costs: some say landlords already charge the max the market allows, others say any regulation that reduces or delays supply raises rents further.

Safety, Health, and Environmental Arguments

  • Pro‑ban voices emphasize:
    • Earthquake risks from gas mains and historical explosions.
    • Chronic gas leaks in old SF buildings.
    • Indoor air pollution from gas combustion and broader climate impacts of the gas network.
  • Skeptics argue:
    • Gas appliances like direct‑vent water heaters are simple, reliable, and independent of electricity.
    • Cooking emissions themselves dominate indoor pollution, and good ventilation matters more than fuel choice.
    • The change is framed as “environmental” rather than as a seismic retrofit policy that might be more publicly acceptable.

Gas vs Induction Cooking and Culture

  • Strong split on cooking preferences:
    • Gas fans cite responsiveness, pan movement techniques (wok hei, basting, flambé), compatibility with diverse cookware, and cultural traditions (especially various Asian cuisines).
    • Induction supporters highlight faster boil times, precise and repeatable temperature settings, easier cleaning, better safety with kids, and widespread professional adoption in some sectors.
  • There is debate over induction warping pans and needing new cookware; some report issues, others say quality pans and sensible use avoid problems.

Energy System & Grid Considerations

  • Questions raised about SF heating: some claim the mild climate plus insulation means modest heating needs, with heat pumps providing efficient heating/cooling.
  • Counterpoints note:
    • Very high PG&E electricity prices (quoted up to ~$0.70/kWh) versus cheaper gas.
    • Gas‑fired plants in Nevada supplying California electricity, with long transmission lines linked to wildfire risks and “exported” pollution.
  • Supporters see the long‑term goal as shrinking the urban gas grid; critics see a costly, symbolic step that shifts emissions elsewhere rather than lowering demand meaningfully.

Ideology and Policy Framing

  • Some view the policy as a normal climate measure in line with other countries; others see it as part of an increasingly “nanny‑state” approach that prioritizes collective goals over individual choice and enjoyment (both in stoves and cars).
  • There is recurring tension between “every marginal action helps” versus “this is performative and economically damaging in an already stressed city.”